Discuss the Ideological and Psychological Splits of the European Travellers in the Middle East by Focusing on Two Ali Behdads Analysis of the Nineteenth-Century Travel - Research Paper Example

Discuss the Ideological and Psychological Splits of the European Travellers in the Middle East by Focusing on Two AliBehdad’s analysis of the Nineteenth-Century Travel Narratives Behdad relates orientalism and colonialism in the 19th century the book is an insight into travel writing common in the 19th century and its function in European colonialism. The belated travellers talks of travellers who arrived late into the middle-east when a lot had already been changed, and what the travellers felt was regret for having missed the experience. Behdad in this book analyzes orientalism. Behdad views orientalism as a complex field that depends on its own ambivalence to preserve its control as a communication of its discontinuity. Behdad states that the oriental journeys represent scientific research or romantic self-discovery. The bottom fact is the representation of servant seeking knowledge attainable through individual observation (Behdad 21). According to Behdad, the orientalist desire is to give the public a picture that is obtained from ones perspective. The orientalist tries to give meaning to his audience. The orientalist is never interested in the recognizing of others subjectivity or the culture. The orientalist looks at his country of interest and tries to give meaning to his personal experience in this country (21). The orient played a vital role in European colonialism through his the political and oral observation made during his travels. Behdad states that the subject presented by the orient do lay between the fantasies of the orient whereby his desires become real, and the image of the society as unattainable domain of absolute repression. Behdad explains that the split between the subject and the orients discourse is because of a political and ideological implication (Behdad 23). Behdad looks at the modern orientalists who represent the desire of the orient. Behdad looks at Flaudert and Eberhadts among other modern Orientals, and he states that the modern Orientals do involve themselves with oriental other. The modern Orientals involve the other oriental in their work through participation involvement and indulgence. Behdad concludes that the modern Orientals do give up themselves to the experience of the journey forgetting to capture the oriental signified. Behdad does explain that the orient journey has an egoistic drive for knowledge. An orient on return from this journey does have a reserved fascination with the other. The modern orient according to Behdad does possess the spirit for self-realization. These travellers also had the desire to understand and become part of the oriental culture. This differentiates them from the Orientals of the colonialism era. These Orientals of the colonial era focused on their travel separated their orients from the other and did not get involved with the culture of their orients (Behdad 21). Behdad asserts that orients once they get involved with the culture, and the other does surrender his or her power of representation, and the pursuit of knowledge becomes a participant in the immediate reality of the oriental culture. Behdad looks at Flaubert’s travelling orient who uses decontextualized quotations to bring out contrast. This according to Behdad expresses the oriental’s quest for exotic signifiers that attract the reader to purchasing the clothing. Tweeds clothing catalogue a representation of Flaubert’s work does as a differential sign of otherness, which the company utilises to display its clothing (Behdad 134). Flaubert’s notes, de voyage, represent the crucial point of opposition in the power relations of the dominant discourse. Behdad explains that orientalism allows for discursive slippage and disorientation that are proficient in orientalists epistemology and colonial power. Behdad states that, orientalism should not be viewed as a negative force in relation to power. Behdad considers orientalism as a formative element that portrays its role in ensuring that natural discourse facilitates the hegemonic power of culture. Behdad made the observation that hybridity is the sign of Productivity of colonial power (135). It is clear that, at some point, the desire of the orient is portrayed in the strategies of dominion and control this in Behdads view has a link to how power is enacted in the desires of oriental’s. Behdad states that power and orientalism do produce one another, and this could be clear by observing the orients desire and linking it to the administrative and institutional discourse. Behdads states that Flauberts oriental notes left him indifferent to politics of representation. Flauberts encounter with the other raises awareness of the art of silence. Flauberts’ Non-representation of his observation made him opt to talk to himself in an effort to fulfil his desire for orientalist representation (Behdad 56). Orientals parasites according to Behad is the noise arising from the condemnation of the east, but for the parasites, they are neither advocating for oppressed or in a position to seize power (Behdad 121). The oriental parasite feeds the system with the course of discontent. The orientalist parasites in the colonial era could be strategically placed in the middle of power, because they were between the colonial power and the oriental desire. Orientalism according to Said was a constellation of false assumption underlying western world towards east. Behdads idea on oriental’s and the modern oriental provides a significant difference to the desires of the orient in the 19th century. The modern oriental’s in a bid to connect the findings of his travels to his oriental desires does fall into the trap of getting involved with the oriental other. The modern oriental does adapt the cultures of the oriental other failing to make representation of his desires. Eberhardts and Flaubert fit the description of oriental parasites in the sense that they represent belated travellers who get ideological limitation. Behdad s view of the modern orientalist is that the oriental’s act as the catalyst to colonialism. The modern Orientals in a way get carried away in trying to represent their desires, which distinguishes them from the Orientals of the 19thcentury who clearly established their oriental desires, and defined their oriental others without having to involve themselves with the culture of their orients. According to Behdad, the oriental parasite would represent the modern orient that uses the orientals failure to address his desires in the 19th century about the oppression of the middle east could be due to power and also as a result of their involvement with the oppressed society. Just like Flaubert, silence became a new mode of representation. However, they did make their representation on the private journals. Work Cited Behdad, Ali. Belated Travellers: Orientalism in the Age of Colonial Dissilution. United States: Duke University pPress, 1994.Print Chouiten, Lynda. “The Other Battle: Postcolonialism and Ressentiment.” Journal of Post Colonial Theory and Theology (2011): 1-28.Print Read More